The clinical and subjective outcomes associated with spinal manipulation: A case study
Spinal manipulation (SM) has been documented to have various physiological effects, of which the research literature has started to reflect over the past decade. This case study was designed with intent to further investigate these findings. A 31 year old woman with experience of lifting weights and working a very physical job presented with ipsilateral right-sided lower neck and shoulder pain (C7-T4, right trapezius, and right scapula area) and bilateral low back pain (L1-L5 and S.I joint area). Following the examination, a differential diagnosis list was decided on with the input of multiple doctors and therapists. The primary treatment was SM over a time span of 6 months. The patient displayed significant results. Objective testing through a follow-up range of motion (ROM) examination showed an increase in ROM and a spinal examination presented a reduction in local muscle tightness. In addition, subjectively, the patient reported a significant reduction in pain, an increase in movement confidence, and ability. The results of this case study suggest that SM in conjunction with patient education has a significant positive effect on the patient’s reduction of pain, local muscle tightness and increase in ROM, and patient movement ability and confidence. Further studies are required to isolate the specific effects of SM in a high-powered study and clinical setting.
- Gyer G, Michael J, Inklebarger J, Tedla JS. Spinal manipulation therapy: Is it all about the brain? A current review of the neurophysiological effects of manipulation. J Integr Med. 2019;17:328-37.
- Williams B. An Investigation Into the Impact Spinal Manipulation May Have on the Performance of Strength Athletes. Thesis. :20-46.
- Cross KM, Kuenze C, Grindstaff TL, Hertel J. Thoracic spine thrust manipulation improves pain, range of motion, and self-reported function in patients with mechanical neck pain: A systematic review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011;41:633-42.
- National Institutes of Health. Spinal Manipulation: What You Need to Know Maryland: NCCIH, National Institutes of Health; 2019.
- Whittingham W, Nilsson N. Active range of motion in the cervical spine increases after spinal manipulation (toggle recoil) J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;24:552-5.
- Yang J, Lee B, Kim C. Changes in proprioception and pain in patients with neck pain after upper thoracic manipulation. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27:795-8.
- Haavik H, Murphy B. Subclinical neck pain and the effects of cervical manipulation on elbow joint position sense. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2011;34:88-97.
- DeVocht J, Pickar J, Wilder D. Spinal manipulation alters electromyographic activity of paraspinal muscles: A descriptive study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2005;28:465-71.
- Lehman GJ, Vernon H, McGill SM. Effects of a mechanical pain stimulus on erector spinae activity before and after a spinal manipulation in patients with back pain: A preliminary investigation. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2001;24:402-6.
- Mittinty MM, Vanlint S, Stocks N, Mittinty MN, Moseley GL. Exploring effect of pain education on chronic pain patients' expectation of recovery and pain intensity. Scand J Pain. 2018;18:211-9.
Comments & Peer Review
Volume & Issue : Vol 6 No 1 (2022)
Page No.: 19-21
How to Cite
Copyrights & License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Search for this article in: